This five minute debate on technology vs. Arts degrees is weak on the side of the arts. Against Belinda Parmar, campaigning tech agency Lady Geek’s CEO, the Guardian art critic Adrian Searle often resembles a rabbit in the headlights. He says he couldn’t bear a world full of technocrats and I would like to develop that thought.
It is not just technology that is important, and it is certainly not the most important advance for society, despite the financial and career rewards at the moment. Logically, a world focused on developing technology leaves less room for the ideas, visions and – if you like – soul, behind them. Think human and machine: Ghost in the Shell, Blade Runner: The Final Cut, or I Robot. Amazing films. I studied them at University and learned about the ideas and moral questions of technology. I wonder if you learn as much about the arts when you study technology.
Films that belong with the arts and the arts are where philosophy and how to live and morals are truly debate and grow, by the people who study, love and invest in the arts. Technology certainly does enhance the arts, but I say there is no point to technology without the arts. Study of the arts (and I don’t just mean through a University, of course) are there for that purpose, and that is what they are worth. Technology may well provide fantastic career options, but I gained an arts degree for the purpose of a career and to nurture and appreciate myself, the world, and the stories of life.